Here are the highlights of the open forum given by Dr. Atef El Banna on Constitutional Amendments, held at El Sakia on Wednesday 23rd, Feb. This is a translation and can't be quoted as direct quotes from Dr. El Banna, alot of it is an attempt at capturing the meaning rather than word for word. Apologies if I missed something - the notes were taken in quite a hurry.
Dr. Atef El Banna is a professor of Constitutional Law at Cairo University, and a member of the panel/committee set to amend the constitution.
Introduction
I speak as an Egyptian citizen who cares for this country and a man of law . I do not speak as a member of the panel amending the constitution.
I will not speak of our activities because we are not done yet, but we might be done by the beginning - mid of next week and we will invite all men of law, politics, the civil population, syndicates and several different institutions for dialogue.
Amendments have to allow a real genuine room for a decent number of nominees, and enable/facilitate it more for independents. They are the majority of the Egyptian people until now. Articles have to allow them the chance to nominate, by having a low number of nominations from parliament and shura council. We hope that there will be guarantees that give a voice to those I will call 'The Tahrir People'. To represent public Egyptian opinion with all it's ideologies and directions.
Articles Discussed
Among others, we are discussing articles: 75, 76, 77, 88, 93..(offers explanation to articles) as well as articles 41, 44, 45, articles addressing personal human freedoms.
We want to move towards deleting parts of article 74, placed in the constitution since 1971, giving the president scope to create a full dictatorship..Back then, the nation turned into a full prison - newspapers were shutdown, professors, clergy men, the pope, journalists etc. Where arrested or sent into exile.
Also the article that addresses terrorism; 179 Many articles, other than the suggested 5-6 are being discussed. We are also discussing legalities relevant to many other matters.
A New Constitution?
The scenario that suggests creating a new constitution at the moment isn't really wholesome.. This takes time. We have had a people's revolution. This is not only the youth's revolution, it was sparked by them, organized by them, they put the effort, but they were joined by the people, all levels from all social classes and religions and politics and all walks of life. Independents, doctors, professors, peasants, labor workers..It is a true Popular revolution and it has succeeded.
The Success of the Revolution
When the president declared he was stepping down, whether he used the word 'abandon' or 'resign' or whatever - it all means the same thing..The president LEFT power. He was removed. He was forced to leave because the revolution forced him to leave.
The revolution that consisted of several Tahrir squares , that later started moving to maspiro and the presidential palace, were deal sealers. They were the real beginnings of the success of the revolution, and when the army joined the people, and I'm a man of law and I know what i'm saying, when the armed forces convened - continuously - and they were acknowledging the people's rightful/ligitimate demands, and declared they won't be violent against the people..All this, were indicators that the army was joining the people, so the revolution did succeed.
The armed forces got to power through the legitimacy of the revolution. Not from the president. They are a revolutionary power. When this happens and not in accordance with the constitution, then indeed the revolution succeeded.
For the larger part, I do trust these men, these leaders are working towards their original goals - protecting their homeland. For a determined time, they are in charge while these amendments and changes take place. Due to the fact that they joined the people, they are the ones now forming the government and amending the constitution. If this revolution had a leader, it would have been this leadership that is in control, but because that's not the case, they are.
Future Phase
A constituent Assembly has to be elected and formed of a number of representatives of the several different directions to place a new constitution or oversee more amendments, but I personally prefer a new constitution.
I do not encourage replacing the constitution right now, and we are not equipped to do so now even if we wanted to..Although we are all men of law and competent enough, we're not equipped because we do not have this right, we're only 7 or 8! We discussed everything and still we believe we can't be the ones who do it…nor can the armed forces. They just want to bring stability and democracy to the land. So right now, we don't have to discuss whether it will be a parliamentary or presidential system, they can both be democratic with the right circumstances, but this is not our role ( the panel or the armed forces).
Whether parliament will consist of one or two councils is also the same. Both can be perfectly democratic under the right circumstances, and I personally prefer one council to fully represent all the people equally. So for now we amend articles that have everything to do with these institutions and councils that pave the way for the next phase.
Closing remarks
Egypt was never a republic. This has not been a republic and the former president was not a president of a republic.
We're focusing on the people's assembly, the shoura council, narrowing the president's powers, however not completely, for the next coming phase must enable room to amend further articles or the constitution itself. The referendum in the coming couple of months will be focusing on these articles until we arrive to a new constitution, discussing together, all of us, a parliamentary or a presidential system.
I encourage a parliamentary system, and believe it will be the only thing that brings true reform to Egypt. We have been under singular individual power for 7000 years! But in the case of a parliamentary system, the president will then be a ceremonial figure, and the real power will go to the parliament.
Dr. Atef El Banna is a professor of Constitutional Law at Cairo University, and a member of the panel/committee set to amend the constitution.
Introduction
I speak as an Egyptian citizen who cares for this country and a man of law . I do not speak as a member of the panel amending the constitution.
I will not speak of our activities because we are not done yet, but we might be done by the beginning - mid of next week and we will invite all men of law, politics, the civil population, syndicates and several different institutions for dialogue.
Amendments have to allow a real genuine room for a decent number of nominees, and enable/facilitate it more for independents. They are the majority of the Egyptian people until now. Articles have to allow them the chance to nominate, by having a low number of nominations from parliament and shura council. We hope that there will be guarantees that give a voice to those I will call 'The Tahrir People'. To represent public Egyptian opinion with all it's ideologies and directions.
Articles Discussed
Among others, we are discussing articles: 75, 76, 77, 88, 93..(offers explanation to articles) as well as articles 41, 44, 45, articles addressing personal human freedoms.
We want to move towards deleting parts of article 74, placed in the constitution since 1971, giving the president scope to create a full dictatorship..Back then, the nation turned into a full prison - newspapers were shutdown, professors, clergy men, the pope, journalists etc. Where arrested or sent into exile.
Also the article that addresses terrorism; 179 Many articles, other than the suggested 5-6 are being discussed. We are also discussing legalities relevant to many other matters.
A New Constitution?
The scenario that suggests creating a new constitution at the moment isn't really wholesome.. This takes time. We have had a people's revolution. This is not only the youth's revolution, it was sparked by them, organized by them, they put the effort, but they were joined by the people, all levels from all social classes and religions and politics and all walks of life. Independents, doctors, professors, peasants, labor workers..It is a true Popular revolution and it has succeeded.
The Success of the Revolution
When the president declared he was stepping down, whether he used the word 'abandon' or 'resign' or whatever - it all means the same thing..The president LEFT power. He was removed. He was forced to leave because the revolution forced him to leave.
The revolution that consisted of several Tahrir squares , that later started moving to maspiro and the presidential palace, were deal sealers. They were the real beginnings of the success of the revolution, and when the army joined the people, and I'm a man of law and I know what i'm saying, when the armed forces convened - continuously - and they were acknowledging the people's rightful/ligitimate demands, and declared they won't be violent against the people..All this, were indicators that the army was joining the people, so the revolution did succeed.
The armed forces got to power through the legitimacy of the revolution. Not from the president. They are a revolutionary power. When this happens and not in accordance with the constitution, then indeed the revolution succeeded.
For the larger part, I do trust these men, these leaders are working towards their original goals - protecting their homeland. For a determined time, they are in charge while these amendments and changes take place. Due to the fact that they joined the people, they are the ones now forming the government and amending the constitution. If this revolution had a leader, it would have been this leadership that is in control, but because that's not the case, they are.
Future Phase
A constituent Assembly has to be elected and formed of a number of representatives of the several different directions to place a new constitution or oversee more amendments, but I personally prefer a new constitution.
I do not encourage replacing the constitution right now, and we are not equipped to do so now even if we wanted to..Although we are all men of law and competent enough, we're not equipped because we do not have this right, we're only 7 or 8! We discussed everything and still we believe we can't be the ones who do it…nor can the armed forces. They just want to bring stability and democracy to the land. So right now, we don't have to discuss whether it will be a parliamentary or presidential system, they can both be democratic with the right circumstances, but this is not our role ( the panel or the armed forces).
Whether parliament will consist of one or two councils is also the same. Both can be perfectly democratic under the right circumstances, and I personally prefer one council to fully represent all the people equally. So for now we amend articles that have everything to do with these institutions and councils that pave the way for the next phase.
Closing remarks
Egypt was never a republic. This has not been a republic and the former president was not a president of a republic.
We're focusing on the people's assembly, the shoura council, narrowing the president's powers, however not completely, for the next coming phase must enable room to amend further articles or the constitution itself. The referendum in the coming couple of months will be focusing on these articles until we arrive to a new constitution, discussing together, all of us, a parliamentary or a presidential system.
I encourage a parliamentary system, and believe it will be the only thing that brings true reform to Egypt. We have been under singular individual power for 7000 years! But in the case of a parliamentary system, the president will then be a ceremonial figure, and the real power will go to the parliament.
No comments:
Post a Comment